Latest Castle Doctrine Shooting in SC--Sort of

This is a discussion on Latest Castle Doctrine Shooting in SC--Sort of within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; The owners should have called the police first and had them clear the home. This should have been avoided....

Hey phreddy: Obviously the prosecutor makes the final call. I would be surprised to find that charges are filed; the owners have every right to be in that house with no duty to retreat if they come across a trespasser who entered the house forcibly (it must have been locked)--that activates all aspects of SC law leading to actually shooting the trespasser. As said on several replies, this begged for a 911 call and police intervention as the only responsible and safe thing to do. Somehow I can possibly see that the owners of the house, being oriental, may have a very different take on whose responsibility it should be with regards to a home they own.

If the law actually says dwelling, the legal definition can mean: a structure where a person lives and especially sleeps.

Castle Doctrine would apply if it was your dwelling, where you sleep.

Stand Your Ground law(s) would apply in any place you have a right to be that wasn't your dwelling, with no duty to retreat.

As for me, I'da called the law. Here's why:
If the law finds a person dwelling in a vacant house I own, the person will be charged with a crime, I will (most likely) not. If I have the house insured, my insurance may pay any damages caused by the interloper (after a deductible). It is also possible that the victim compensation funds of some states may pay for any damages by the squatter.

Something else to consider... What if the interloper was using your vacant house as a meth lab? (not infrequent or out of the realm of possibility). In some states, you could be charged with a "disorderly house" (not very likely but possible). You could have the house taken under seizure laws for drug activity (less likely, but stranger things have happened). By calling the law, you are doing everything in your power to make certain that any such activity is stopped, and CYA with LEO call and action.

If the law actually says dwelling, the legal definition can mean: a structure where a person lives and especially sleeps.

Castle Doctrine would apply if it was your dwelling, where you sleep.

Stand Your Ground law(s) would apply in any place you have a right to be that wasn't your dwelling, with no duty to retreat.

As for me, I'da called the law. Here's why:
If the law finds a person dwelling in a vacant house I own, the person will be charged with a crime, I will (most likely) not. If I have the house insured, my insurance may pay any damages caused by the interloper (after a deductible). It is also possible that the victim compensation funds of some states may pay for any damages by the squatter.

Something else to consider... What if the interloper was using your vacant house as a meth lab? (not infrequent or out of the realm of possibility). In some states, you could be charged with a "disorderly house" (not very likely but possible). You could have the house taken under seizure laws for drug activity (less likely, but stranger things have happened). By calling the law, you are doing everything in your power to make certain that any such activity is stopped, and CYA with LEO call and action.

Umm, unless trhe police come, find the meth lab, search to see who is resposible, (owner of house) and arrest the owner for running a meth lab. Does it matter what prompted the police to go to the house in the first place?

May be legal but real stupid. It was a VACANT house. Let the law handle it. I wouldn't want to lose a single nights sleep over some bum caught in one of my vacant rentals. Let the local PD take care of it....it's not like the guys gonna steal the house.

You think one night wouldn't make a difference. I have seen what a homeless man can do to a house in one night like rip all the copper out of the walls and steal the a/c unit. They can destroy an interior of a home and cause lots of damage. A home is a home and you don’t invade it. A homeless man in it is going to fight when confronted; that’s the way of the street so I do believe that he was aggressive

Hwy Oak: Good comment on "dwelling". It may not be Castle Doctrine (possible) but it is still my property and not the BG who forcibly entered my property. Try it in SC and see what happens to you. I'll tell you what will happen--you will receive a letter of commendation from the county sheriff or town police dept. As I said, you don't screw around with other people's property in SC. It is just one lower step than hanging a horse thief.